JKEASURt  ROOM 

DUKE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
DURHAM,  N.  C. 


Rec'cL 


-■    I 


^ 


i 


Form  934— 20M— 8-34— C.P.Co. 


"m  Mumt»  audi  the  ite. 


REPORT 


COMMITTEE  UNDER  THE  RESOLUTIONS  OF  1862, 


- 


;and  ££ottae  of  fivmnw, 


IN    REFERENCE    TO 


OUR  RELATIONS  AS  MASONIC  BODIES  AND  AS  MASONS,  IN  THE  NORTH 

AND  SOUTH.  OROWIfl  THH  MANNKi:  IN  WHICH 

THE  PRESENT  WAR  HAS  BEEN  PROSECUTED. 


the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia,  December  12,  1864,  and  ordered  to  be  published. 

Qrand  Secretary. 


RICHMOND: 

■    II    WYNNE,  !■■;!'. 

186  5. 


REPORT. 


Referring  to  the  previous  action  of  this  Gnind  Lodge,  and  the  pre- 
vious reports  of  this  Committee,  and  to  the  resolutions  of  this  Grand 
Lodge,  for  all  the  history  of  our  past  action  in  relation  to  the  Masonic 
bodies,  and  to  the  Masons  of  the  United  States,  the  Committee  report : 

Since  their  last  Report,  the  Committee  have  come  into  the  possession 
of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  New  York  at  its  Grand 
Annual  Communications  iu  June,  1863,  and  in  June,  1864  ;  of  the 
Grand  Lodge  of  Maryland  at  its  Annual  Communication  in  Nuvember, 
1863;  and  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Wisconsin  at  its  Grand  Annual 
Communication  in  June,  1864. 

These  Proceedings  furnish  proper  Masonic  evidence  of  the  action  of 
these  Grand  Lodges;  and  the  extracts  made  by  Pommittees  of  Corres- 
pondence from  the  proceedings  of  other  Grand  Lodges,  furnish  evidence 
of  the  spirit  and  action  of  the  Grand  Lodges  from  whose  proceedings 
these  extracts  are  made.  From  these  sources  of  information,  we  are 
prepared  to  recommend  action  which  we  believe  this  Grand  Lodge  is 
bound,  in  justice  to  itself,  and  to  the  Masons  under  its  care,  to  take  at 
the  present  time. 

These  proceedings  and  extracts  show,  that  in  many,  if  not  all  the 
Q-rand  Lodges  of  the  United  States,  we  are  stigmatized  as  traitors  and 
rebels;  and  by  the  authority  of  Masonic  bodies,  Masons,  as  Masons, 
are  urged  to  invade  our  country  and  destroy  us;  and  reproaches  and 
insults  are  heaped  upon  us.  We  therefore  believe  it  is  our  duty  to 
place  on  our  records  a  vindication  of  our  position,  and  the  position  of 
our  country  in  the  present  conflict  Jjetween  the  Confederate  States  and 
the  United  States. 

We  know  that  Masonry  and  politics  are  entirely  separate  from 
other;  but  when  our  enemies,  as  MasoBs,  misrepresent  our  pot 
brin.  •;  1   apply  to  us  terms  of  insult  and  re- 

intended  by  their  v<  ry  falshood  to  gloss  over  and  y 
the  usurpation  and  oppression  they  arc  attempting  to  practice  on  us,  it 
becomes  our  solemn  duty  to  vindicate  our  character  I  the 

of  our  country,  and  this  vindication   mayprOperlj 
on  our  Masoni  p  we  do  not  understand  that  sort  i  - 

by  which  a  man  may  be  a  good  Mason  and  a  dishonest  man  —  /.  > .  a 


266223 


traitor  and  a  rebel  who  deserves  extermination  :  nor  do  we  understand 
the  sort  of  Masonry  which  makes  Masons  desire  fraternal  intercourse 
with  traitors  and  rebels. 

We  regret  our  inability  to  present  this  vindication  in  a  manner  wor- 
thy of  the  subject  and  the  occasion;  but  we  will  submit  our  views,  in 
the  hope  they  will  meet  the  favor  of  this  Grand  Lodge. 

We  believe  if  all  human  governments  which  ever  existed  over  men 
on  this  earth  were  analyzed,  they  .would  be  found  to  rest  on  one  of  two 
principles : 

1st.  Coercion  of  the  people  governed,  without  regard  to  their  consent 
or  wishes. 

2d.  Consent  of  the  people  governed. 

1st.  The  first  of  these  principles  is  despotism.  As  a  foundation  of 
government,  it  has  been  repudiated  in  America  since  the  Revolution  of 
1776.  Our  fathers  fondly  hoped  that  by  the  treaty  of  peace  of  the 
22d  April,  1783,  they  had  finally  established  the  American  doctrine 
that  all  government  for  them  and  their  posterity  must  rest  on  the  con- 
sent of  the  governed;  and  this  continued  to  be  recognised  as  our  funda- 
mental principle  of  government  until  our  enemies  undertook,  by  the 
present  war,  to  establish  by  coercion  a  government  over  us;  to  which 
we  not  only  refuse  our  consent,  but  for  which  we  have  the  strongest 
feeling  of  loathing  and  detestation. 

2d.  The  second  principle,  viz:  consent  of  the  people  governed,  when 
qualified  by  proper  constitutional  restrictions,  becomes  a  limited  Mon- 
archy or  a  Constitutional  Republic. 

When  the  constitutional  restrictions  are  wise,  and  the  government  is 
honestly  administered  within  them,  such  a  government  confers  a  greater 
degree  of  happiness  on  its  people,  and  developes  a  greater  amount  of 
strength,  than  any  other  form  of  government. 

But  if  there  are  no  constitutional  restrictions,  or  if  the  government 
is  dishonestly  administered,  without  regard  to  those  restrictions,  it  be- 
comes one  of  the  most  oppressive  tyrannies  on  earth.  It  becomes  a 
government  of  factious  demagogue^  who,  by  some  delusive  but  popular 
cry,  obtain  power,  inflame  the  passions  of  the  people,  administer  the 
government  to  promote  their  own  ambitious  ends,  and  crush  every  con- 
stitutional right,  and  every  man  of  integrity  who  differs  from  them; 
or  it  may  become  a  wild  anarchy,  in  which  the  fiat  of  an  irresponsible 
popular  majority  is  the  only  power,  and  which  sweeps  away,  by  every 
storm  of  popular  passion,  every  right,  no  matter  how  ancient  or  how 
sacred. 

It  was  a  government  founded  on  the  consent  of  the  people  of  each 
State,  restrained  by  wise  constitutional  provisions,  and  honestly  admin- 
istered within  those  provisions,  our  ancestors  endeavored  to  establish, 


and  for  such  a  government  we  are  now  contending.     This,  we  think, 
will  be  apparentfroni  a  few  brief  statements. 

Our  ancestors,  by  the  treaty  of  peace  of  1783,  established  for  them- 
selves and  their  posterity  the  great  principle  that  all  government  must 
be  founded  on  the  consent  of  the  people  of  each  State.  That  treaty 
recognised  by  name  each  State  as  a  sovereign  and  independent  State. 

At  that  epoch,  the  States  were  united  by  Articles  of  Confederation 
which  committed  the  management  of  foreign  affairs  to  a  Congress 
chosen  by  the  State  Legislatures.  These  Articles  continued  in  force 
until  17S9,  when  a  Constitution  was  formed  by  a  convention,  the  mem- 
bers of  which  were  chosen  by  each  State;  and  this  Constitution  was 
submitted  in  each  State  to  a  sovereign  convention  elected  by  the  people 
of  that  State.  The  conventions  adopted  the  new  Constitution,  and 
thereby  abolished  the  old  Articles  of  Confederation. 

Clearly,  tbat  Government  was  founded  on  the  consent  of  the  people 
of  each  State,  and  guarded  by  such  constitutional  restrictions  as  it  was 
supposed  would  insure  its  honest  and  fair  administration  within  those 
restrictions;  and  as  this  form  of  government  was  adopted  and  put  in 
operation  within  seven  years  of  the  date  of  the  treaty  of  peaco 
which  established  the  great  principle  that  all  governments  must  be 
founded  on  the  consent  of  the  people  of  each  State,  it  is  not  to  be  pre- 
sumed that  its  framers  intended  to  renounce  that  principle  cither  for 
themselves  or  their  posterity.  There  is  no  such  renunciation  in  the 
Constitution,  and  a  fair  construction  of  that  instrument  shows  none  wag 
intended. 

Let  us  examine  this  instrument.     We  remark  first  — 

By  adopting  this  Constitution,  our  ancestors  ventured  on  an  experi- 
ment in  government.  They  attempted  to  divide  the  powers  of  govern- 
ment between  two  different  classes  of  agents,  but  both  deriving  their 
powers  from  the  people  of  each  State  acting  separately  as  States. 

I.  To  the  United  States  they  assigned  the  management  of  fore;gn 
intercourse,  both  for  war  and  peace,  including  the  regulation  of  foreign 
commerce  and  some  domestic  subjects  which  it  was  supposed  could  be 
put  under  general  and  uniform  regulations,  such  as  coining  money,  fix- 
ing the  standard  of  weights  and  measures,  regulating  commerce  with 
the  Indian  tribes  and  among  the  States,  carrying  the  mails,  cstabli.-hing 
uniform  l.iws  of  naturalization  and  bankruptcy,  and  granting  patents 
for  useful  inventions. 

This  government  was  confessedly  one  of  limited  powers.  The  pow- 
ers grauted  to  it  were  all  enumerated;  and  the  legislative  power  of 
Congress  was  limited  to  the  passage  of  such  laws  as  were  necessary  to 
carry  into  execution  the  granted  powers.  As  the  legislative  power  is 
co-extensive  with  all  the  other  powers  of  the  government,  this  limitation 


2GG223 


6 

restrained  the  powers  of  all  the  other  departments  of  the  government 
to  the  grants  of  the  Constitution.  Under  this  restriction,  the  laws  of 
the  United  States  and  the  acts  of  the  government  were  limited  to  the 
subjects  enumerated  in  the  Constitution. 

The  government  operated  directly  on  the  property  and  persons  of  the 
people,  but  only  as  incidental  to  the  powers  granted,  and  to  carry  them 
into  effect. 

II.  Let  us  now  see  what  remained  to  each  State. 

All  the  objects  of  human  government  class  themselves  under  three 
heads,  and  are  embraced  in  them  : 

1.  Lands,  estates,  and  interests  in  lands,  and  all  contracts  relating  to 
them. 

2.  Personal  property,  and  all  rights,  obligations  .and  contracts  relat- 
ing to  it. 

3.  Persons,  personal  rights,  and  all  laws  and  contracts  relating  to 
them,  including  our  social  and  civil  rights. 

These  three  classes  embrace  the  great  mass  of  human  rights  and  hu- 
man legislation ;  and  over  them  the  power  of  each  State  is  and  has 
always  been  sovereign  and  supreme.  This  is  established  by  the  con- 
stant exercise  of  this  sovereignty  by  each  State,  its  recognition  by  the 
other  States,  and  by  the  United  States  Government. 

The  importance  of  this  subject  must  be  our  excuse  for  more  detailed 
statements. 

•  1.  Lands,  &c  That  the  entire  sovereignty  over  lands  in  the  territo- 
rial limits  of  each  State  is  vested  in  that  State,  is  proved  by  its  constant 
exercise. 

All  laws  creating  and  regulating  estates  in  lands,  the  titles  to  those 
estates,  the  modes  of  conveyance  among  the  living,  or  passing  by  in- 
heritance or  devise  from  the  dead;  all  laws  regulating  liens,  mortgages 
and  registrations,  are  .passed  by  the  States  in  which  the  lands  are  situ- 
ated; all  questions  affecting  interests  in  lands  are  settled  by  the  supreme 
power  of  the  State  in  which  they  are  situated. 

When  questions  as  to  lands  are  drawn  to  the  decision  of  the  courts, 
they  are  usually  acted  on  in  the  State  courts.  If  the  courts  of  the 
United  States  obtain  jurisdiction  from  the  non-residence  of  the  parties, 
or  other  cause;  they  always  follow  the  decisions  of  the  State  courts;  or 
in  other  words,  carry  the  State  laws  into  effect. 

The  United  States  can,  in  the  exercise  of  its  government,  interfere 
with  lands  only  incidentally  to  its  granted  powers.  The  only  case  in 
which  she  can  acquire  direct  sovereignty  or  jurisdiction  over  lands,  is 
where,  under  the  Constitution,  and  by  the  consent  of  the  State,  lands 
are  purchased  for  forts,  dock-yards,  &c,  and  the  sovereignty  of  the 
State  over  such  purchase  is  actually  ceded  by  her. 


This  doctrine  is  unquestioned  as  to  the  old  thirteen  States.  Some 
questions  have  been  raised  as  to  the  new  States  created  out  of  the  public 
lands;  but  all  these  questions  have  been  settled  in  favor  of  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  States  by  repeated  decisions.  We  will  cite  only  one  of 
them.  In  the  case  of  PbUard  vs.  Ihvjnn,  3  Howard  212,  the  Supremo 
Court  of  the  United  Sfatcs  decided — 

"That  the  United  States  uever  held  any  municipal  sovereignty,  jurisdiction, 
or  right  of  soil  in  and  to  the  territory  of  which  Alabama  or  any  of  the 
new  States  were  formed,  except  for  temporary  purposes  and  to  execute  the 
trusts  created  by  the  acts  of  the  Virginia  and  Georgia  Legislatures,  an 
deeds  of  cession  executed  by  them  to  the  United  States,  and  the  trust  created  by 
the  treaty  of  the  ,10th  April,  1803,  with  the  French  Republic  ceding  Louisiana." 

^  It  was  decided  that,  when  the  State  was  admitted  into  the  Union,  the 
right  of  eminent  domain  passed  to  the  State.  And  it  has  beeu  repeat- 
edly and  (irmly  settled  that,  when  the  United  States"  executed  the  trust 
for  which  she  held  the  public  lands,  and  sold  any  part  of  those  lands, 
the  lands  so  sold  were  held  by  the  purchaser  under  the  laws  of  the 
State  as  fully  as  lands  were  held  in  the  old  thirteen  States. 

The  same  doctrines  are  settled  as  to  lands  ceded  by  the  Florida 
treaty. 

2.  Personal  property,  rights  in  it  and  contracts  relating  to  it. 

By  the  uniform  practice  of  all  the  States,  full  sovereignty  exists  in 
each  State  over  personal  property  and  contracts  relating  to  it  within  the 
State. 

The  State  decides  what  subjects  may  be  personal  property,  and  the 
mode  of  its  transmission  by  delivery,  gift,  bill  of  sale,  deed— by  will 
or  statute  of  distributions.  It  grants  probate  of  wills,  administrations, 
regulates  the  powers  and  duties  of  executors,  administrators,  guardians, 
trustees,  &c.  All  trusts,  mortgages,  pledges;  all  loans  and°gifts;  all 
questions  as  to  bonds,  bills  of  exchange,  notes,  &c;  all  questions  of 
usury,  interest,  borrowing  o*r  lending,  are  regulated  by  its  laws.  The 
only  exceptions  to  this  sovereignty  are  in^thc  right  of  the  United 
States  to  pass  uniform  laws  of  bankruptcy,  and  as  incident  to  its  power 
to  regulate  foreign  commerce  and  the  coasting  trade,  to  pass  laws  in 
reference  to  the  titles  of  vessels,  and  to  regulate  vessels  in  the  exercise 
of  Us  admiralty  and  maritime  jurisdiction.  In  all  other  respects  the 
1  States  can  touch  personal  property  only  incidentally  \u  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  limited  pdirers  granted  to  them. 

3.  Sovereignty  over  the  persons  and  personal  rights  of  the  people  is 
vested  in,  and  has  uniformly  been  exercised  by  each  State  in  its  territo- 
rial limits. 

The  State  sovereignty  alone  can  punish  murder,  arson,  robbery,  rape, 


8 

assaults,  and  generally  all  crimes  against  persons  and  property  in  its 
territory.  It  alone  can  define  and  punish  crime.  Each  State  in  it.s 
own  territory  has  the  sole  power  to  regulate  the  relations  of  husband 
and  wife,  parent  and  child,  master  and  servant — to  sanction  marriages, 
grant  divorces,  and  to  regulate  all  the  social  and  civil  rights  of  the 
people  in  its  territory. 

Supreme  sovereign  power  over  the  persons  and  personal  rights  of  all 
persons  within  the  territorial  limits,  is  vested  in  each  State,  with  the 
following  exceptions  : 

1.  If  a  citizen  enters  the  army  or  navy  of  the  United  States,  he  be- 
comes subject  to  the  articles  of  war,  and  may  be  punished  for  offences 
against  those  articles  by  the  authorities  of  the  United  States. 

2.  Offences  against  other  laws  passed  to  carry  into  execution  the 
powers  granted  to  the  United  States  may  be  punished  by  that  govern- 
ment— such,  for  example,  as  robbing  the  mails,  counterfeiting  her 
coin,  &c. 

3.  Treason  committed  against  that  government  by  persons  owing 
allegiance  to  it  may  be  punished  by  its  authority. 

From  this  it  is  manifest  that  sovereignty  over  all  the  vast  and  multifa- 
rious concerns  of  life  is  vested  in  the  States;  and  the  only  exceptions 
are  in  the  power  of  the  U.  States  government  to  interfere  with  persons 
and  property  in  some  limited  cases,  and  as  incidental  to  the  powers 
granted  in  the  Constitution.  It  is  also  manifest  that  the  powers  granted 
to  the  United  States  were  to  enable  them  to  use  the  common  means  of 
the  States  to  protect  them  from  invasions  or  aggressions  of  foreign 
powers,  and  on  some  few  specified  domestic  subjects  to  establish  uni- 
form rules  of  action. 

The  powers  granted  to  the  United  States  are  therefore  secondary  in 
their  character,  and  subordinate  to  the  States  they  were  designed  to 
protect. 

III.  The  third  remark  we  make  is  that  on  all  these  subjects  the  sove- 
reignty of  each  State  is  exclusive. 

No  State  has  a  right  to  pass  any  law,  or  do  any  act,  affecting  lands, 
personal  property  or  persons  in  any  other  State  of  the  United  States. 
No  State  can  grant  divorces,  solemnize  marriage,  or  change  the  relations 
of  parent  and  child,  master  or  servant,  in  any  other  State,  for  the  power 
of  each  State  over  all  these  things  is  exclusive  within  its  own  territory. 
From  this  exclusive  power,  it  follows  that  every  State,  as  to  all  of  these 
powers,  is  foreign  to  every  other  State.  In  all  respects  each  State  is 
as  fully  exempted  from  the  legislative,  executive,  or  judicial  action  of 
every  other  State,  as  it  is  from  similar  interference  from  Great  Britain 
or  any  other  European  State. 


9 

IV.  The  tenth  article  in  amendment  of   the   Constitution  of   the 
United  States,  declares — 

"  The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  or  pro- 
hibited by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively,  or  the  people." 

It  is  obvious  that  this  reservation  is  to  the  people  of  each  State ;  be- 
cause a  reservation  of  a  right  is  a  retention  of  that  right  by  the  former 
owner;  and  as  the  right  of  sovereignty  over  lands,  persons  and  property 
was  vested  in  the  people  of  that  Slate,  this  reservation  continues  it  to 
them  ;  and  consistently  with  this  reservation,  exclusive  sovereignty  has 
been  continuously  exercised  by  the  people  of  each  State  over  their  own 
State,  separate  from,  independent  of,  and  foreign  to  every  other  State. 
The  doctrine  of  those  who  would  consolidate  the  Union  and  deny 
State  rights  is,  that  the  powers  reserved  by  this  article  were  reserved 
to  the  people  of  the  whole  Union.  This  construction  does  violence  to 
the  terms  of  the  article.  It  converts  a  reservation  into  a  grant.  It  is 
absurd.  It  cannot  be  conceived  that  within  seven  year's  after  the  ter- 
mination of  a  war  which  established  the  principle  that  the  foundation 
of  government  over  each  State  was  the  consent  of  the  people  of  that 
State,  and  that  each  State,  in  its  domestic  sovereignty,  was  foreign  to 
every  other  State — the  men  who  had  periled  their  all  to  establish  this 
principle,  should  grant  away  the  separate  sovereignty  of  each  State  to 
the  whole  people  of  the  United  States,  and  should  make  that  grant 
in  terms  which,  by  literal  construction,  reserved  that  sovereignty  to  the 
as  it  formerly  existed  :  and  furthermore,  it  is  absurd,  that  if  they 
had  done  this,  the  exercise  of  the  sovereignty  of  each  State  should  have 
continued  without  question  or  doubt  for  seventy  years. 

But  among  the  rights  of  the  people  of  each  State,  was  the  right  to 
give  or  withhold  their  consent  to  any  government  attempted  to  be  set 
up  or  continued  over  them.  This  right  was  not  granted  to  the  United 
States,  or  prohibited  to  the  people  of  each  State.  It  was  therefore  re- 
served to  them  with  all  their  other  rights  of  sovereignty. 

V.  The  powers  granted  to  the  United  States  were  granted  to  protect 

the  great   mass  of  rights  vested   in  etch  of  the  States  from  foreign  ag- 

lii  d,  and  to  regulate  some  few  matters  of  common  interest      They 

were  therefore  subservient  and  subordinate  to  the  great  mass  of  .social, 

civil  and  property  rights  vested  in  the  States. 

I>ut  from   the  n  of  government,  the  powers  which  would 

accumulate  in   the  hands  of  the.  United  States  were  immense;  and  if 
e  powers  should  be  corruptly  used,  and  by  concerted  action  with  a 
portion  of  the  States  perverted  to  the  oppression  of  other  of  the  St 
a  conflict  inu-t  aii.-e  between  the  corrupt  United  States  government  and 
the  States  aetiDg  with  it,  and  the  States  sought  to  be  oppressed;  for  it 


10 

is  the  duty  of  the  State  attempted  to  be  oppressed  to  preserve  from  the 
lawless  action  of  the  government  of  the  United  States,  and  the  States 
acting  with  it,  the  immense  mass  of  social,  civil  and  property  rights 
confided  to  it. 

This  is  precisely  the  conflict  which  has  arisen  between  the  United 
States  and  the  Confederate  States.  The  gradual  encroachments  of  the 
United  States  on  the  sovereignty  of  the  States;  the  constant  interfer- 
ence with  the  domestic  institutions  of  some  of  these  States  by  other 
States  and  by  the  United  States;  the  persevering  efforts  by  class  legis- 
lation to  make  the  agricultural  mere  tributaries  to  the  manufacturing 
and  commercial  States ;  the  unceasing  efforts  to  consolidate  the  Union, 
viz:  to  set  aside  all  constitutional  restrictions  on  the  government  of  the 
United  States;  the  manifest  design  to  reduce  all  power  to  the  fiat  of  a 
popular  majority;  the  formation  of  a  great  sectional  party  to  accom- 
plish these  objects ;  the  inflammation  of  the  passions  of  the  people  of  the 
greater  part  of  the  United  States  against  some  of  the  States  of  the 
Union; — these  things  made  it  the  duty  of  the  States  now  composing 
the  Confederate  States  to  withdraw  from  the  United  States. 

VI.  In  so  doing,  they  violated  no  provision  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States ;  for  there  is  no  provision  forbidding  a  State  to  with- 
draw from  the  Union.  The  State  of  Virginia,  when  she  entered  the 
Union,  expressly  reserved  the  right  to  withdraw  at  her  pleasure.  As 
she  entered  on  equal  terms  with  every  other  State,  this  must  have  been  p 
considered  the  right  of  every  other  State. 

There  is  no  provision  of  the  Constitution. forbidding  a  State  to  with- 
draw from  the  Union.  The  reasoning  which  would  deny  this  right  to 
a  State,  is  founded  on  the  assumption  that  the  government  of  the 
United  States  exists  over  each  State  without  the  consent  of  its  people — 
i.  e.,  it  is  a  despotism. 

We  have  shown  thi3  government  was  laid  on  the  foundation  of  the 
consent  of  the  people  of  each  State;  and  it  cannot  be  replied  that  our 
ancestors  in  1789  made  a  compact  by  which  they  attempted  to  take  from 
their  posterity  the  benefit  of  this  great  principle — for  no  such  compact 
existed — and  the  reasoning  which  attempts  to  set  it  up,  is  founded  on 
the  hypothesis  that  men  who  resisted  the  government  that  had  thereto- 
fore existed  over  their  fathers,  because  they,  the  posterity,  withdrew 
their  consent  to  the  continuance  of  that  government  over  them,  intended 
to  deprive  their  posterity  of  rights  they  themselves  exercised  and  called 
inalienable  and  sacred.  Such  reasoning  rejects  consent  as  the  founda- 
tion of  government,  and  places  it  on  coercion.  It  disregards  all  con- 
stitutional restrictions,  and  finds  its  pabulum  in  the  proud  and  avaricious 
desire  to  set  up  a  great  government  which  will  extend  its  power  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth,  and  enable  the  merchant  and  the  manufacturer  of 


11 

the  North  to  make  money  out  of  all  "nations,  kindreds  and  tongues;" 
and  this  money  to  be  made  by  so  regulating  commerce  with  the  States, 
that  the  agricultural  States  may  be  made  tributary  to  the  commercial 
and  manufacturing  States.  Vvom  such  a  Union  we  believe  it  was  the 
solemn  duty  of  our  State  to  withdraw;  and  since  her  withdrawal  we 
have  abundant  evidence  that  we  were  right. 

It  is  impossible  to  believe  the  savage  and  barbarous  warfare  wao-ed 
on  us— the  desolation  of  farms,  driving  families  that  had  been  affluent 
from  their  homes  without  shelter,  raiment  or  food;  the  destruction  of 
furniture  and  raiment,  even  to  the  garments  of  the  new-born  babe  ■  the 
destruction  of  agricultural  implements  and  mills;  burning  towns,  bom- 
bardment of  cities;  the  outrages  practised  on  feeble  old  men  and  help- 
less  females— ft  is  impossible  to  believe  that  these  things  spring  from 
any  recent  feeling.  We  find  in  them  evidence  that  feelings  of  raucor- 
ous  hatred  and  malice  have  long  been  cherished  against  us  in  the 
Northern  States.  It  is  true,  that  before  this  war,  men  of  the  North 
who  desired  office  at  our  hands,  or  who  desired  lucrative  trade  with  us 
have  approached  us  with  professions  of  brotherly  love  and  affection,  and 
have  assured  u*  that  the  hatred  and  malice  of  which  we  complained 
were  confined  to  a  small  fanatical  party,  and  were  reprobated  by  the 
great  mass  of  the  community.  But  we  have  seen  this  fanatical  party 
exalted  to  the  chief  power  of  the  governments,  both  Federal  and  State, 
and  exalted  because  of  this  very  hatred  to  us.  We  have  seen  men  who 
were  the  loudest  in  their  professions  of  attachment  to  us,  coalescing 
with  this  fanatical  party,  placed  among  its  leaders,  and  are  now  seeking 
our  blood  with  all  the  avidity  of  tigers.  We  have  seen  the  whole  popu- 
lation of  the  North  gloating  with  fiendish  exultation  over  the  accounts 
of  barbarities  inflicted  on  us,  and  rejoicing  in  the  hope  that  our  people 
were  doomed  to  extermination  by  the  lingering  horrors  of  famine  and 
starvation.  With  such  a  people  we  can  never  again  unite  in. any  gov- 
ernment, and  although  our  sufferings  may  be  great,  yet  we  rejoice  we 
are  separated  from  them. 

VII.  In  withdrawing  from  the  United  States  we  have  violated  no 
allegiance. 

We  have  always  been  taught  that  allegiance  is  due  to  a  government 
for  the  protection  it  afforded  the  p;r.sous,  families,  rights  and  property 
of  the  citizens— that  allegiance  and  protection  are  reciprocal. 

To  our  Slate  government  we  have  always  looked  for  the  protection 
of  our  persons,  families,  property  and  rights  as  citizens,  and  to  it,  in 
the  highest  sense,  our  allegiance  is  due.  It  is  true  the  United  Sta 
government  was  once  entrusted  with  limited  powers,  given  to  protect  us 
against  foreign  enemies,  and  to  regulate  our  commerce  with  foreigu 
friends;  and  as  long  as  it  performed  those  duties  honestly,  its  powers 


12 

were  permitted  to  remain.  But  when  it  attempted  fraudulently  to  use 
them  for  our  destruction,  they  were  withdrawn  by  the  sovereign  action 
of  our  State.  It  is  no  longer  our  government.  We  owe  it  no 
allegiance,  and  all  persons  owing  it  allegiance  are  to  us  foreigners  and 
aliens,  and  during  this  war  must  be  alien  enemies. 

VIII.  In  withdrawing  from  the  United  States  we  have  violated  no 
duty  as  Masons. 

The  Constitutions  of  Masonry  teach  us, 

"  Whoever  will  be  a  true  Mason  is  further  to  know,  by  the  rules  of  his  art,  his 
allegiance  as  a  subject  and  citizen  will  not  be  relaxed,  but  enforced.  He  is  to 
be  a  lover  of  quiet,  peaceable  and  obedient  to  the  civil  powers  which  yield  him  pro- 
tection and  are  set  over  him  where  he  resides  or  works,  so  far  as  there  is  no  infringe- 
ment of  the  limited  bounds  of  reason  and  religion." 

This  duty  as  Masons  we  honestly  perform  by  adhering  to  the 
eovereign  power  of  our  own  State.  It  is  under  our  State  government 
we  hold  all  our  rights  as  husbands,  fathers,  and  owners  of  property.  It 
is  by  its  benign  laws  that  the  purity,  honor  and  fair  character  of  our 
families  are  preserved.  It  is  by  its  laws  all  our  affairs  with  our  neigh- 
bors are  regulated  and  the  rewards  of  our  industry  secured.  It  is  under 
it  we  reside  and  work. 

The  United  States  government  has  infringed  the  bounds  of  religion 
and  reason  by  attempting  to  set  over  us  an  usurped  and  tyrannical 
despotism.  Masonry  does  not  require  us  to_  yield  allegiance  to  usurpers 
and  tyrants. 

We  think  it  behooves  us  to  put  this  vindication  of  ourselves  as 
men  and  citizens  on  our  records  and  permit  it  to  go  down  to  our  suc- 
cessors. For  while  Masonry  has  nothing  to  do  with  war  or  politics, 
the  vindication  of  our  characters  as  honest  men  and  good  citizens  is 
dear  to  us,  and  we  feel  we  are  doing  justice  to  Masonry  in  preserving 
our  fair  fame  from  men  who  have  borrowed  the  garb  of  Masonry  to 
make  the  assault. 

Leaving  this  defence,  we  proceed  to  the  proper  Masonic  enquiries. 

In  entering  on  these  we  discriminate  between  Masonry  and  the 
organizations  which  regulate  its  government  and  utter  its  teachings. 
Masonry  itself  is  a  universal  brotherhood  of  good  men  of  every  clime 
and  nation,  associated  for  objects  of  benevolence,  charity,  relief  to  the 
worthy,  and  the  promotion  of  the  peace,  purity  and  the  happiness  of 
mankind.  Men  having  its  secrets,  conforming  to  its  obligations,  and 
worthily  practising  its  precepts,  are  to  be  received  as  brethren  from 
every  part  of  the  earth. 

But  the  organized  bodies  having  charge  of  its  government  and  teach- 
ings are  not  an  essential  part  of  Masonry.     They  are  as  distinct  from  it 


13 

as  the  preachers  and  hierarchy  of  a  church  are  from  the  pure  and  holy 
religion  of  Christ.  The  hierarchy  may  become  corrupt,  they  may  per- 
vert their  powers  and  teachings  so  as  to  become  preachers  of  unrighteous- 
ness and  of  war  and  rapine.  They  may  make  their  church  organizations 
the  supporters  of  political  wickedness  in  high  places,  and  impel  their 
followers  to  all  the  atrocities  of  unjust  war.  They  may,  by  their  cor- 
rupt teachings,  render  themselves  unworthy  to  be  called  ministers  of 
religion.  But  the  disgrace  aud  reproach  is  their  own,  and  ought  not 
to  be  imputed  to  religion.  Indeed,  the  true  followers  of  religion  ought 
to  be  more  attached  to  it  and  labor  harder  to  preserve  it  from  per- 
version. 

This  illustration  will  properly  apply  to  Masonry.  The  Lodges  and 
Grand  Lodges  charged  with  its  government  and  its  teachings  may 
become  corrupt  and  try  to  pervert  its  organized  po-rars  from  the  pure 
and  peaceful  ends  of  the  Institution  to  unmasonic  and  improper  pur- 
poses, and  thereby  render  themselves  unworthy  depositaries  of  its  power 
and  teachings;  but  this  should  not  cause  us  to  value  Masonry  the  less, 
or  deprive  a  truly  worthy  brother  of  its  indefeasible  benefits. 

We  are.forced,  by  the  information  we  have  before  us,  to  the  conclu- 
sion, that  the  Masonic  bodies  at  the  North,  to  carry  on  this  ruthless  and 
savage  war  waged  against  us,  are  making  their  organizations  instru- 
ments to  support  the  usurped  power  of  the  present  administration  of 
the  United  States  government. 

We  pass  without  comment  the  charges  of  treason  and  rebellion,  "so- 
called  seceding  States,"  and  other  terms  of  reproach  in  these  publica- 
tions, though  we  must  regard  them  as  manifesting  that  the  Masons  of 
the  United  States  are  deficient  in  brotherly  love  and  respect. 

We  call  attention  to  the  following  particulars : 

1.  In  the  address  of  Grand  Master  Crane  to  the  Grand  Annual  Com- 
munication of  New  York  in  June  1863,  in  page  1G,  is  the  following 
sentence  : 

"Finding,  on  several  occasions  when  presentations  were  made  by  Lodges  and 

'members  of  Lodges  to  individual   Ma  'tiging*  to  the  arjay,  of  swords, 

Bathes  an  1   other  implements  used   in  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  language  had 

which  was  eminently  calculated    to   weaken    those    Masonic    bonds 

throughout  the  whole  of  th<  .  and   which  it  is  our  duty  more  than  ever 

u,  I  issued   a  circular  note  to  all  the  Lodge*,  that  on  such  aud   a'J 

ether  like  occasions  their  members   -liould  refrain  from  pursuing  a  like  course 

when  congregated    as    Masons,    which    request,  I    believe,  has  generally  been 

led.'1  ' 

Now  this  is  a  clear  confession  that  the  Masonic  bodies  of  New  York 
are  making  themselves  parties  to  this  war.  They  are  furnishing  imple- 
ments to  be  used  in  the  prosecution  of  the  war  to  men  in  the  army,  are 


11 

holding  Masonic  meetings,  and  inflaming  not  only  popular  passions,  but 
the  passions  of  Masons  against  us. 

From  his  address  we  infer  the  Grand  Master  approves  the  substance 
of  the  thing.  He  makes  no  objection  to  the  thing  itself,  but  recom- 
mends mild  language.  He  tithes  the  mint,  annise  and  cummin,  and 
neglects  the  weightier  matters  of  the  law. 

2.  The  second  thing  to  which  we  draw  attention  is  the  teaching  that 
Masonry  has  politics,  which  make  it  the  duty  of  Masons  to  engage  in 
the  war,  coupled  with  exhortations  to  them  to  enlist  in  it.  As  a  speci- 
men of  these  teachings,  we  refer  to  the  address  of  G.  M.  Drummond  to 
the  Grand  Lodge  of  Maine.  This  particular  part  of  the  address  is 
found  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  New  York,  Jan.  18G3, 
from  page  50  to  53. 

We  cannot  tak*  time  or  spare  space  to  spread  the  whole  of  this 
extract  on  the  Minutes;  so  much  as  discusses  Masonic  duty  directly 
will  be  extracted. 

The  G.  M.  commences  this  part  of  his  address  by  assigning  his  rea- 
sons for  rejecting  a  proposition  to  unite  in  a  Masonic  convention  in 
reference  to  the  war.  He  declares  that  as  Masons  we  have  peculiar 
duties  in  the  war,  and  to  ascertain  those  we  must  look  to  the  circum- 
stances in  which  we  are  placed.  To  ascertain  the  circumstances  in 
which  we  are  placed  he  gives  his  view  of  the  settlement  of  America 
and  the  Revolutionary  war.  He  say3  of  the  men,  (of  the  Revolutionary 
war,)  "Rejecting  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  rights  of  kings,  they 
announced  as  the  corner-stone  of  their  government  the  equality  of 
man."  He  says  in  eighty  years  the  United  States  became  a  mighty 
nation,  extending  from  the  Lukes  to  the  Gulf,  and  our  flag  was  known 
and  honored  throughout  the  world. 

We  pause  here  to  say  that  in  these  views  of  Grand  Master  Drum- 
mond we  have  the  key  to  the  motives  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  in  this  contest.  They  ignore  all  constitutional  provisions,  assume 
that  the  United  States  government  was  founded  on  the  natural  equality 
of  man,  that  it  is  a  great  nation,  and  their  pride  and  interest  in  its 
power  actuate  them  in  waging  this  war  against  us. 

But  we  resume.  The  G.  M.  proceeds  to  say  that  amid  this  prosperity 
the  thunderbolt  of  civil  war  was  launched  from  the  Southern  sky— a 
portion  of  the  citizens  appealed  from  the  ballot  box  to  the  bayonet. 
(We  consider  this  a  misrepresentation  of  history.)  He  says:  "On 
one  side  they  are  seeking  to  overthrow  the  government  and  establish 
one  for  themselves;  on  the  other,  to  sustain  the  government  and  main- 
tain the  Union  in  its  integrity."  "  The  power  of  men  to  govern  them- 
selves is  the  question."  It  is  to  be  determined  whether  a  government 
of  "  the  people  can  be  sustained." 


15 

We  must  express  our  surprise  that  the  M.  "W.  G.  M.  did  not  perceive 
that  when  we  wished  to  establish  a  government  for  ourselves  we  only 
exercised  our  right  of  self-government;  that  in  sustaining  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Union,  (i.  e.)  of  the  Northern  States,  he  was  violating 
our  right  of  self-government,  and  denying  the  natural  equality  of  mau. 
When  he  speaks  of  maintaining  the  Union  in  its  integrity  he  must 
mean  in  its  territorial  entirety,  and  not  in  the  sacred  regard  for  the 
Constitution  which  constitutes  its  integrity,  and  he  must  know  it  is  the 
Northern  States  who  deny  the  right  of  the  people  to  govern  themselves. 

With  this  comment  wc  pass  the  political  disquisition  which  the  M. 
W.  G.  Master  introduced  to  establish  the  duty  of  Masons. 

He  then  says,  "in  this  most  momentous  crisis  our  duty  as  Masons  is 
not  uncertain  :" 

"  By  the  ancient  charges  a  Mason  is  bound  to  be  a  peaceable  citizen,  and  not 
to  be  engaged  in  plots  and  conspiracies  against  the  peace  and  welfare  of  the 
nation. 

**Saj8  an  old  Masonic  law:  'But  if  it  ever  so  happen  that  a  brother  should 
be  a  rebel  against  the  State,  he  is  not  to  be  countenanced  in  his  rebellion,  how- 
ever he  may  be  pitied  as  an  unhappy  man.' 

'"Twelve  years  ago  a  distinguished  Mason,  in  an  address  before  the  Grand 
Lodge  of  Tennessee,  used  this  language:  'Free  Masonry  demands  from  all  her 
children  obedience  to  the  civil  authority  aud  subjection  to  the  powers  that  be. 
No  mau  is  a  good  Mason  who  is  not  a  patriot  as  well  as  a  philanthropist  in 
principle  as  well  as  practice.' 

♦'Our  own  Dvxj.Ar  has  said:  'The  true  Free  Mason  must  be  a  true  patriot,' 
and  he  asked,  'Is  not  our  cause  and  it  in  achieving  the  ohject  for  which 

it  was  instituted  identical  with  that  of  tnr  common  country?'  'Is  it  not  the 
primary  and  fundamental  object  of  our  Institution  to  1  ropagate  those  everlast- 
ing principles  of  truth  and  morality  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  our  nation- 
ality, and  reat  under-current  in  the  tide  of  our  national  progress?' 

"Another  writei  :•  'Masonry  has  her  politics,  but  not  the  pj'.itics  of  a 

party  or  country.  Her  political  creed  maintains  tho  natural  equality  of  man- 
kind, ftcept  the  precedenoe  due  to  merit,  sanctions  no  aris- 
tocracy except  the  unobtru  ive  nobility  of  virtue.' 

"This  characteristic  of  Masoi  ts  for  the  genial  soil,  for  her  growth 

and  expansion,  this  country  ba  L     On   the  tthor  hand,  Masonry  by 

>'-  '*  it.     Pre* 

institution-  mry  are  muftually  beneficial  to  each  other.     Maeonry  sup- 

peat,  and  <  Masonry.     Said  Lafayette: 

'The  Masonic  institution  in  the  Uui  i   important  pillar  of 

happy  form  of  government.* 

"Our  du 
of  tl. 

may  pity  th  P  our 

I 
our  hands  in  the  t  " 

it ies  of  charit]  .  lad  to  kaow 


16 

there  are  some  among  the  misguided  Southern  brethren  who  have  not 
forgotten  all  their  Masonic  duties;  states  the  conduct  of  M.  Wor.  J. 
Q.  A.  Fellows;  says  there  are  Masons  from  Maine  (not  in  prison)  in 
New  Orleans,  who,  he  hopes,  will  not  fail  to  repay  Grand  Master  Fel- 
lows, and  then  says  : 

"  Let  Masonry  have  its  perfect  wof-k  at  home  and  in  the  field ;  but  let  us  rally 
to  the  support  of  that  flag  beueath  whose  folds  our  Institution  has  so  long 
reposed,  and  let  us  find  in  its  stars  an  emblem  of  the  starry  canopy- above. 

"Our  fathers'  blood  has  hallowed  it,  'tis  part  of  their  renown, 
And  palsied  be  the  caitiff  hand  would  pluck  its  glories  down." 

He  then  speculates  about  Masonry  cementing  the  Union  when  peace 
returns. 

We  have  extracted  the  argument  of  Worshipful  Grand  Master  Drum- 
moud  on  the  d5ty  of  Masons  in  this  war.  We  propose  to  make  a  few 
remarks  on  the  argument,  as  we  believe  it  is  a  fair  specimen  of  the 
Masonic  teaching  of  the  North,  and  we  think  it  heresy.  We  believe 
Masonry  has  maintained  its  high  position  in  the  world  by  separating 
the  man  as  a  Mason  from  the  man  as  a  subject  or  citizen,  holding  him 
by  its  obligation  to  perform  his  duty  as  a  Mason,  and  leaving  him  to 
perform  his  duty  as  a  subject  or  citizen  according  to  his  conscience. 
We  believe  Masonry  teaches  universal  benevolence  and  a  fraternal 
brotherhood  of  its  members  of  every  nation.  Masonry  inculcates  peace, 
charity  and  good  will  among  all  people,  more  especially  among  its  own 
brotherhood. 

That  the  teaching  of  this  address  does  violate  the  character  of 
Masonry  and  attempt  to  make  Masonry  an  instrumentality  in  support- 
ing the  present  war  of  the  United  States  against  us,  and  does  attempt 
to  pervert  Masonry  and  Masonic  duty  into  a  political  and  warlike  duty, 
is  apparent  by  its  careful  consideration. 

The  teacher  gives  an  unfair  and  perverted  statement  of  the  princi- 
ples on  which  the  government  of  the  United  States  was  founded  and 
of  the  course  of  the  Southern  States  in  this  conflict.  This  is  obviously 
done  to  cover  the  South  with  odium  and  prepare  his  readers  for  the 
unfair  and  disingenuous  argument  he  makes  on  Masonic  duty. 

He  states,  "  The  duties  of  Masons  in  this  conflict  are  not  uncertain." 

He  quotes  two  passages  from  an  ancient  charge. 

Now  we  hold  the  ancient  charges  of  the  York  Masons  in  the  highest 
"reverence,  and  the  very  charge  from  which  we  believe  these  extracts 
are  taken,  is,  with  some  slight  variations  in  phraseology,  the  charge 
published  by  our  Grand  Lodge  for  the  government  of  its  Masons. 
But  we  think  it  uncondid  and  unfair  to  pick  out  of  this  charge  particu- 
lar phrases  to  countenance  the  two  unfounded  assumptions  he  makes, 
viz  :   that  Masonry  considers  the  United  States  a  nation,  and  condemns 


17 

the  act  of  the  people  of  one  or  more  of  the  States  for  withdrawing  their 
consent  to  the  continuance  of  its  government  over  them  as  a  violation  of 
Masonic  duty  hy  plotting  against  its  peace  and  welfare;  and  secondly,  that 
the  United  States  is  a  State,  and  the  people  who  withdrew  lawfully  from 
its  government  are  rebels  and  to  be  pitied  as  unhappy  meu. 

We  believe  Masonry  teaches  no  such  thing.  It  has  no  alliance  or 
connection  with  the  government  of  the  United  States,  and  efforts  to  per- 
vert it  to  such  an  end,  are  not  only  a  violation  of  its  principles,  but  de- 
grade it  to  the  condition  of  a  subservient  tool  of  tyrants  and  usurpers. 
We  think  the  use  attempted  to  be  made  of  these  ancient  charges  per- 
verts and  dishonors  Masonry. 

To  sustain  himself,  the  G.  M.  quotes  from  modern  writers. 

Now  we  must  say  we  have  not  the  respect  for  modern  writers  that  we 
have  for  the  ancient  charges.  Each  writer  must  be  judged  on  his  own 
merits  j  and  the  careful  reader  of  modern  Masonic  literature  will  find  it 
has  its  due  proportion  of  crude  and  prurient  trash. 

On  the  address  delivered  twelve  years  ago  in  Tennessee  we  have  no 
comment  to  make.  We  take  it  to  be  the  author's  exposition  of  his 
views,  and  it  may  go  for  what  it  is  worth. 

But  on  the  quotation  from  Dunlap  we  must  look  differently.  Wo 
have  not  before  us  the  address  of  Dunlap  from  which  this  extract  is 
made.  But,  judging  from  the  extract  itself,  and  G.  M.  Druiuiuond's 
interpretation  of  it,  we  must  pronounce  it  an  obscure  and  weak  attempt 
to  make  Masonry  a  political  institution. 

He  asserts  a  true  Free  Mason  will  be  a  patriot.  We  grant  that  he 
will,  as  a  subject  or  citizen,  do  his  duty  to  his  country;  and  as  Free 
Masonry  is  of  universal  obligation,  we  suppose  his  political  conduct  be- 
longs to  his  duty  as  a  man  and  not  as  a  Mason.  But  Mr.  Dunlap,  mak- 
ing the  assertion  that  a  Mason  is  a  patriot,  attempts,  by  two  interroga- 
tions, to  identify  Masonry  with  the  United  States.  In  his  first  inter- 
rogatory, he  asks,  "  Is  not  our  cause  and  its  success  in  achieving  the 
object  for  which  it  was  instituted,  identical  with  our  common  country?" 
In  this  interrogatory  he  must  be  understood  as  asserting  tbe  cause  of 
Masonry  and  of  the  United  States  to  be  identical.  This  sounds  to  us 
as  one  of  the  boldest  and  weakest  pieces  of  demagogueism  to  be  found 
in  any  modern  writer  on  Masonry,  aud  if  true,  it  would  at  once  strip 
■nry  of  that  universal  character  she  has  maintained  from  the  days 
ci   King  Solomon. 

He  sustains  his  assertion  hy  asking  if  the  primary  object  of  Masonry 
i-  Dot  to  promulgate  the  everlasting  prinaiplos  of  truth  and  monlity 
which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  our  nationality,  and  form  the  under-cur 
rent  in  the  tide  of  our  national  progress.  Observe,  he  assumes  thai  the 
primary  object  of  Masonry  is  to  teach  truth  and  morality.     These  cer- 


.    18 

tainly  are  among  the  great  objects  of  Masonic  teaching,  but  are  not  the 
only  ones ;  for  Masonry  was  designed  to  form  one  universal  brotherhood 
of  all  good  men  on  earth. 

But  he  assumes  that  the  truth  and  morality  taught  by  Masonry  lie  at 
the  foundation  of  the  nationality  of  the  United  States. 

We  have  always  understood  the  Union  was  founded  on  the  Constitu. 
lion  of  the  United  States,  and  that  it  did  not,  in  any  proper  sense,  con- 
stitute a  nationality.  But  passing  the  question  whether  the  Constitu- 
tion made  a  nation,  we  do  not  think  truth  and  morality  can  any  more 
be  predicated  of  this  Constitution  than  of  any  other  compact  of  govern" 
ment  by  which  conflicting  interests  are  reconciled.  To  speak  accurately' 
truth  and  morality  cannot  be  predicated  of  the  compact  of  government' 
but  of  its  administration.  Truth  and  morality  are,  properly,  the  quali. 
ties  of  men  administering  the  government.  The  argument  that  Ma 
sonrv  teaches  truth  and  morality,  proves  nothing  as  to  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States.  If  this  be  anything  more  than  an  idle  flourish 
in  a  holiday  address,  it  sets  aside  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
as  the  foundation  of  the  government,  and  attempts  to  substitute  for  it 
vague  ideas  of  truth  and  morality.  We  think  this  is  a  deliberate  viola, 
tion  of  truth  and  morality;  for  the  men  who  administer  the  govern, 
ment  swear  to  maintain  the  Constitution;  and  by  setting  it  aside,  they 
commit  perjury  and  violate  all  morality  and  truth. 

How  far  the  under-current  of  the  prosperity  of  the  Northern  States 
was  due  to  truth  and  morality,  or  how  far  it  was  due  to  rapacity  and  un_ 
fair  dealing,  we  will  not  here  discuss.  We  wish  to  enter  our  protest 
against  these  efforts  to  identify  Masonry  and  the  nationality  of  the 
United  States,  as  a  gross  Masonic  heresy. 

But  Gr.  M.  Druminond  quotes  another  writer,  who  says:  "Masonry 
hasher  politics."  This  is  a  Masonic  heresy;  and  it  is  not  rendered 
the  less  odious  by  the  assertion  that  her  politics  are  not  of  a  party  or 
country.  lie  states  three  marks  of  the  political  creed  of  Masonry  : 
1st.  The  natural  equality  of  mankind.  2d.  It  admits  of  no  ranks  ex- 
cept the  precedence  due  to  virtue.  3d.  It  sanctions  no  aristocracy.  He 
then  says  this  characteristic,  viz:  this  political  creed  of  Masonry,  ac- 
counts for  its  genial  soil  and  its  growth  and  expansion  in  this  country, 
and  argues  to  show  it  is  one  of  the  pillars  of  the  government. 

Now,  if  the  statement  that  Masonry  has  politics,  and  the  character, 
istic  of  her  politics  was  limited  to  an  internal  view  of  the  Institution, 
without  any  relation  to  the  government  and  social  institutions  of  the 
earth,  we  should  be  satisfied  to  say  the  piece  was  incautiously  worded, 
and  gave  an  erroneous  view  of  Masonry  within  its  Lodges.  But  it  is 
probable  it  was  written  in  relation  to  the  governments  and  institutions 
of  the  world,  and  to  establish  the  very  inference  W.  G.  M.  Druminond 


19 

draws  from  it,   viz:  that  Masonry  has  politics  and   in   her  political 
character  is  one  of  the  pillars  of  the  government  of  the  United  States. 

The  proposition  that  Masonry  has  politics,  is  at  war  with  all  the  Ma- 
sonic teaching  of  the  ancients.  That  it  rejects  rank  is  inconsistent 
with  its  establishment  by  King  Solomon  ;  and  that  it  refuses  its  sanction 
to  aristocracy,  is  inconsistent  with  the  records  of  long  lists  of  royal 
and  noble  men  who  have  been  called  to  preside  over  the  Institution. 

But  this  is  not  the  worst  aspect  of  this  teaching.  It  makes  Masonry 
a  society  for  propagating  the  most  radical  creed  ever  preached  on  earth; 
one  which,  preaching  the  natural  equality  of  man,  rejects  all  ranks  or 
established  distinctions  of  society,  and  all  constitutional  restrictions,  and 
then  degrades  Masonry  into  an  institution  to  inflame  Masonic  brethren 
against  each  other,  and  thus  sustain  the  usurpation  of  the  government 
of  the  United  States.  That  this  last  statement  is  a  fair  representation 
of  the  object  for  which  it  is  used,  appears  from  the  subsecpient  parts  of 
the  Worshipful  G.  Master's  address. 

lie  says :  "  Our  duties  {>'.  c,  as  Masons)  are  plain ;  we  must  sustain 
the  government  as  the  very  ark  of  the  covenant.  (Observe,  he  ignores 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States;  and  by  the  government  he  must 
nie;m  the  administration.)  And  though  brothers  are  arrayed  in  arms 
against  us,  we  must  do  our  duty.  We  may  pity  the  unhappy  condition 
of  those  of  the  Order  in  rebellion,  but  must  not  stay  our  hands."  And 
ho  exhorts  them  to  let  Masonry  have  her  perfect  work  at  home  and  in 
the  Jiil J ;  to  rally  to  the  flag  and  let  its  stars  be  an  emblem  of  the 
"starry  canopy," — i.  c,  of  Heaven;  and  then  follows  the  poetry. 

Now,  this  is  mere  sophomoric  trash,  and  would  be  unworthy  of  notice 
but  for  the  fact  that  it  is  an  earnest  and  deliberate  effort  to  make  Ma- 
sonry a  political  institution,  identified  with  the  United  States,  and  an 
earnest  exhortation  to  Masons,  as  Masons,  to  enter  on  a  horrid  fratrici- 
dal war,  as  subservient  to  the  plans  and  conduct  of  the  men  administer- 
ing the  United  States  government. 

The  third  thing  to  which  we  ask  attention,  is  the  action  of  the 
Lodges  in  encouraging  men  to  enter  this  war  by  conferring  on  them  the 
degree  of  Masonry  as  a  reward  for  thus  enlisting. 

On  page  65  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  New  York, 
we  find  the  following  extract  from  an  address  of  the  Deputy  (i.  Master 
to  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Indiana  : 

"In  several  instances  ]  have  granted  dispensations   to  Lorfjjes  to  confer  de- 
upon  persona  in  their  jurisdiction  without  requiring  them  to  wait  the  timo 
oontemplati  ■!  by  their  by-laws,  it  baring  been  represented  to  me  thai  Buofa  part!** 
bad  enlisted  Ln  the  service  of  tin   I  and  were  about  to  leave  for  the 

seat  of  war.     Baofa  eatei  m  these  would  bate  justified  the  action  of  the  Lodge 
without  the  necessity  of  a  dip].  it  the   parties  should  be  well  knowu 

and  of  unblemished  character." 


20 

On  this  the  Committee  of  Correspondence  in  New  York  remarks : 

"The  Deputy  G.  Master  was  of  course  amply  justified  in  issuing  bis  dispen- 
sation in  the  instances  to  which  he  alludes.  Indeed,  there  could  be  nothing  ap- 
pealing more  warmly  to  the  patriotism  and  gratitude  of  a  true  Mason  than  a 
case  just  of  this  character." 

Thi3  extract  shows  these  Grand  Lodges  are  making  Masonry  a  party 
to  this  war.  The  act  of  enlisting  to  carry  war  into  our  country,  with 
all  its  horrors  and  devastations,  killing  their  brethren,'  driving  the  fami- 
lies of  Masons  from  their  homes  and  exposing  them  to  all  the  insults 
and  indignities  of  a  brutal  soldiery,  are  acts  which  appeal  to  the  grati- 
tude of  all  true  Masons.  And  they  invest  men  with  the  panoply  of 
Masonry  the  better  to  practice  these  horrors  on  us. 

The  true  spirit  of  these  Lodges  will  be  found  in  an  extract  on  page 
66,  from  the  Report  of  a  Committee  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Indiana, 
in  reply  to 'the  Grand  Lodge  of  Nebraska,  quoted  without  dissent  by 
the  New  York  Committee  : 

"We,  as  Masons  of  Indiana,  say  to  our  brethren  who  have  or  may  enter  into 
the  service  in  defending  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  'You  have  our 
approval.  March  on  to  glorious  victory.  Drive  from  our  land  the  desolating 
hand  of  rebellion,  but  remember  when  you  have  subdued  your  foe  he  is  no  longer 
guch.     Extend  to  him  those  God-like  attributes — mercy  and  charity.'  " 

It  is  our  duty  as  Masons  to  suppress  the  feelings  of  scornful  defiance 
such  utterances  excite,  but  we  must  notice  this  in  a  Masonic  point  of 
view. 

This  emanates  from  Indiana,  a  State  carved  out  of  the  territory  ceded 
by  Virginia  to  the  United  States  for  the  common  benefit  of  all  tbe 
States.  The  title  to  every  homestead  and  to  every  Lodge  in  this  State 
rests  on  the  liberality  of  Virginia.  Virginia  has  never  devastated  the 
State  of  Indiana,  nor  did  those  Masons  fear  she  would.  Yet  as  Ma- 
sons, they  urge  Masons,  in  fierce  and  vindictive  language,  to  invade  and 
desolate  Virginia — urge  them  to  "  march  on  to  glorious  victory — drive 
from  our  land  the  desolating  hand  of  rebellion."  We  notice  this  sen- 
tence not  only  as  vindictive,  but  as  a  deliberate  suggestion  of  falsehood. 
"Our  land!"  They  did  not  fear  the 'desolation  of  their  land.  It  was 
the  land  of  Virginia  they  wished  desolated,  and  this  because  they  falsely 
stigmatise  our  exercise  of  the  unalienable  right  of  self-government  as 
rebellion.  We  say  this  is  making  Masonry  a  political  engine,  to  urge 
Masons  to  fratricidal  war,  to  deeds  of  rapine  and  violence,  and  by  pre- 
varication and  suggestions  of  falsehood. 

As  to  their  tender  of  mercy  and  charity — we  have  already  seen  too 
much  of  the  mercy  and  charity  extended  by  their  chosen  agents,  Lin- 
ooln,  Butler,  Hunter,  Sheridan,  Sherman  and  others  who  conduct  this 
war,  to  wish  their  mercy  or  charity. 


21 

IV.  Another  evidence  that  the  Grand  Lodges  of  the  United  States 
are  making  Masonry  subservient  to  this  war,  is  found  in  granting  dis- 
pensations or  warrants  to  Military  Lodges,  to  attend  their  armies  in  the 
invasion  of  our  country. 

As  it  may  be  supposed  a  Masonic  precedent  for  these  Military  Lodges 
is  found  in  the  British   Military  Lodges,  we  here  notice  the  difference. 

In  Great  Britain   the  army  is  a  permanent  establishment.     Some  of. 
the   regiments   in  it  were  established   in  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
have  maintained   perpetual  succession   since.     Others  were   established 
since,  but  maintain  their  perpetual  succession. 

The  distinction  between  the  Military  State  and  the  Civil  State  is  well 
known  in  Great  Britain.  Men  who  go  into  the  army,  go  into  it  as  a 
profession  for  life,  and  few  return  to  civil  life.  Their  homes  are  with 
their  regiments,  and  these  regiments  are  ordered  on  duty  to  any  part  of 
the  colonies  of  Great  Britain;  so  that  the  men  have  no  permanent 
abode.  It  was  proper  to  give  these  men  the  benefit  of  Masonry;  and 
as  the  chief  object  was  to  afford  Masonic  intercourse  to  these  men  at 
home  and  in  the  colonies  within  the  jurisdiction  of  their  own  govern- 
ment, the  fact  that  they  might,  when  transiently  in  a  foreign  country, 
where  Grand  Lodges  existed,  work  occasionly  under  their  own  charters, 
did  not  give  evidence  of  hostility  to  those  Grand  Lodges  ;  and  although 
in  the  way  Masonic  jurisdiction  of  Grand  Lodges  is  now  settled,  (espe- 
cially in  America,)  it  would  be  an  interference  with  Grand  Lodge  juris- 
diction, yet  in  the  time  these  Lodges  were  created  such  an  interference 
was  not  designed. 

Let  us  see  now  the  difference  in  the  Lodges  established  with  the  army 
of  the  United  States.  That  army  is  raised  solely  for  the  purpose  of  in- 
vasion and  couqucst  of  the  Southern  States.  In  these  States  Grand 
Lodges  existed,  each  having  a  jurisdiction  co-extensive  with  the  geo- 
graphical limits  of  the  State. 

It  is  admitted,  if  any  Grand  Lodge  of  the  United  States  had  in  times 
of  peace  granted  authority  to  any  number  of  its  citizens  travelling 
through,  or  sojourning  in,  the  Southern  States,  to  forai  Lodges  and 
work  as  Masons  without  the  permission  of  the  Grand  Lodge  in  whose 
jurisdiction  they  worked,  such  an  act  would  be  an  hostile  invasion  of 
the  Grand  Lodge,  in  which  they  worked.  This  being  so,  we  cannot  see 
how  the  hostility  and  disregard  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  injured 
Grand  Lodge  is  diminished,  by  the  fact,  that  those  Masonii  ^ere 

attempted   to   be  conferred  on  men  visiting  that  Jurisdiction  Bolely  for 
loes   make    the  Grand    Lodges  direct   parties  to 
that    hostility,  and   attempts  to  make   Masonry  a  means  of  giving  ;.:  I 
and  eomfort  to  enen 

'in:  the  army  in  which  these  Lodges  arc  establi  oporary 


22 

in  its  character,  composed  of  citizens  who  have  volunteered  or  been 
drafted  from  private  life,  and  who  retain  their  homes  and  relations  in 
private  life,  and  expect  to  return  to  it.  Some  of  these  officers  and  men 
have  entered  the  army  with  the  ambitious  desire  to  win  military  dis- 
tinction, as  a  means  of  obtaining  offices  of  honor  and  profit  under  their 
own  governments;  others  that  they  might  amass  fortunes  by  obtaining 
lucrative  positions  and  contracts  ;  others  with  the  expectation  of  thriving 
on  the  plunder  and  robbery  of  the  Southern  people;  others  with  the 
hope  they  might  remain  in  the  conquered  country  on  the  estates  from 
which  they  ejected  the  men  they  falsely  stigmatized  as  rebels,  and 
might  live  among  an  abject  and  cowed  population  as  the  satraps  and 
trusted  friends  of  the  conquering  power.  But  whatever  may  have  been 
th^  motives  with  which  these  men  entered  the  service,  they  all  designed 
returning  to  civil  life,  and  retained  their  relations  with  it.  The  grant 
of  Masonic  powers  to  these  men  wa3,  therefore,  intended  to  make 
Masonry  a  stimulant  to  their  efforts  to  subdue  us,  and  an  agency  in  the 
war. 

Again  :  the  working  of  these  Lodges  were  irregular  and  unmasonic. 
Whether  this  arose  from  the  looseness  of  the  grants  or  from  the  unwor- 
thiness  of  the  hands  in  which  it  was  placed,  we  do  not  know.  That 
the  fact  exists,  is  proved  by  the  complaints  of  the  Grand  Lodges  them- 
selves. From  among  these  complaints  we  select  a  report  of  a  Committee 
of  Wisconsin,  pages  71  and  72  : 

"  The  Select  Committee  to  whom  was  referred  so  much  of  the  Grand  Master's 
Address  as  relates  to  the  initiation  of  residents  of  Wisconsin  in  Military  Lodges 
established  in  the  army  by  the  Grand  Lodges  of  other  jurisdictions,  have  had 
the  same  under  consideration,  and  report: 

"That  during  the  present  War  several  of  the  Grand  Lodges  have  established, 
by  dispensation,  what  are  denominated  Military  Lodges,  the  officers  and  mem- 
bers of  which  are  volunteei'3  from  the  respective  States,  by  the  Grand  Lodges  of 
•which  such  Lodges  are  established.  A  Lodge  so  established  travels  with  the 
regiment  or  brigade  to  which  it  is  attached,  and  is  opened  and  held  at  such 
times  and  places  as  may  be  convenient,  and  wherever  its  members  may  happen 
to  be  located  by  the  exigencies  of  the  service.  Authentic  information  has  been 
received  that  persons  who  have  been  for  several  years,  and  still  are  residents  of 
Wisconsin,  have  been  initiated  iu  such  Lodges.  That  some  of  such  persons 
would,  doubtless,  have  been  rejected  if  they  had  applied  to  the  Lodge  nearest 
their  residence,  and  where  they  were  known,  and  that  others  had  already  been 
rejected  at  home.  What  has  occurred  in  reference  to  residents  of  this  jurisdic- 
tion has  undoubtedly  occurred  to  residents  within  the  jurisdiction  of  other  Grand 
Lodges.  We  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  this  is  an  evil  which  ought  to  be 
promptly  remedied.  Of  what  use  is  it  for  the  fraternity  of  Wisconsin  to  labor 
to  maintain  a  high  standard  of  personal  qualifications,  and  to  sustain  the  dignity 
of  the  character  of  Free  Masonry  in  this  jurisdiction,  if  these  unworthy  and 
rejected  applicants  are  to  be  thrust  upon  the  Craft  by  other  Graud  Lodges, 
through  the  medium  of  Dispensated   Lodges  working  outtide  their  territorial 


23 

jurisdiction  ?  We  say  by  the  Gritnd  Lodges  of  other  States,  for  in  the  opinion  of 
the  Committee,  it  is  the  Grand  Lodge  which  establishes  a  travelling  Lodgo, 
rather  than  the  Lodge  itself,  which  is  responsible  for  its  transactions.  At  all 
events,  it  is  with  the  Grand  Lodge  alone  that  we  have  to  do.  Whenever  a  Grand 
Lodge  deems  it  proper  to  establish  a  travelling  Military  Lodge,  it  should  make 
due  provision  that  the  Lodge  so  established  should  not  interfere  with  the  juris- 
diction of  other  Grand  Lodges,  and  should  give  it  no  more  extensive  power  than 
it  may  lawfully  grant  to  ordinary  Lodges  within  its  jurisdiction.  We  feel  con- 
fident that  this  subject,  being  brought  to  the  attention  of  our  sister  Grand 
Lodges,  they  will  see  the  propriety  of  staying  the  wrong  which  they  are  thus 
inflicting  upon  the  Fraternity  in  other  jurisdictions." 

From  this  it  clearly  appears  that  these  Lodges  were  conferring 
Masonic  character  on  unworthy  men,  who  could  not  obtain  it  at  home, 
and  initiated  men  who  never  were  nuder  the  jurisdiction  of  their  Grand 
Lodges.  How  far  this  evil  goes,  we  know  not ;  but  we  have  reason  to  " 
fear  they  make  white  nun  Masons  who  were  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia.  And  when  we  see  some  of  the  Grand 
Lodges  teaching  that  Masonry  has  politics,  and  her  politics  tench  the 
equality  of  mankind  and  the  support  of  the  nationality  of  the  United 
States,  we  have  reason  to  fear  that  the  canon  of  Masonry,  which  limits 
its  benefits  to  the  free-born,  is  through  these  Lodges  to  be  set  aside,  and 
Masonry  made  an  instrument  to  subvert  all  our  social  and  governmental 
institutions. 

V.  The  act  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia  in  grant- 
ing a  dispensation  to  Union  Lodge  in  the  city  of  Alexandria  and  within 
the  jurisdiction  of  this  Grand  Lodge. 

That  we  do  not  misrepresent  this  act,  or  draw  improper  conclusions 
from  it,  we  ask  that  so  much  of  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  Cor- 
respond, nee  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  New  York  as  contaius  the  docu- 
ments on  this  subject,  commencing  at  page  153,  with  the  words, 
"Documents  Relating/'  and  ending  on  page  —  with  the  words,  "and 
the  dispensation  granted,"  and  so  much  of  the  address  of  G  M.  Stane- 
berry  in  .May,  L862,  as  relates  to  this  subject,  commencing  on  page  102 
with  the  words,  "In  February  last,"  &e.,  and  ending  on  page  I  I'M  with 
the  words,  "be  continued  under  dispensation,"  be  put  on  record  with 
this  report. 

We.  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of 
Columbia  was    specially  convened    ou    the    12th    of   February, 
The  Grand  Master  states  it  was  convened  to  decide  a  question   1 
his  province.     He  states  he  In-  received  a  petition  from  Theodore  G. 
Palmer  and  nine  others,  who  are  vouched  for  as  worthy  Masti 
praying  for  a  dispensation    to  form  a  new    Lodge  in  Alexandria,     lie 
says   Palmer  represents  there  is  no   Lodge  working  in  that  city.     The 


24 

charter  cannot  be  found,  had  been  removed,  and  the  Masons  residing 
there  are  cut  off  from  the  enjoyment  of  Masonic  privileges.  He  says : 
"  It  is  also  stated  "  (but  he  does  not  say  by  whom)  "  that  the  Grand 
Lodge  of  Virginia  forbids  those  working  under  her  jurisdiction  to 
recognize  or  hold  Masonic  intercourse  with  Masons  who  adhere  to  their 
allegiance  to  the  Union." 

He  then  says,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  a  petition  of  this  kind 
could  not,  for  a  moment,  be  entertained,  because  to  grant  this  dispensa- 
tion would  be  an  invasion  of  the  territory  of  a  sister  Grand  Lodge,  an 
act  which  the  Masons  of  this  country  uniformly  repudiated,  but  says: 
"  The  question  for  us  now  is  whether  the  present  state  of  things  will 
justify  us  in  establishing  a  new  precedent  to  afford  our  brethren  of  the 
loyal  part  of  Virginia  the  rights  and  benefits  of  our  Order." 

On  that  he  has  not  formed  a  decided  opinion,  but  intimates  it  is 
desirable  it  should  be  done  if  it  can.  He  says  if  the  dispensation  can 
fairly  be-  considered  an  invasion  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Grand 
Lodge  of  Virginia,  he  inclines  to  think  it  ought  to  be  refused;  but 
asks,  "can  it  be  so  considered  if  that  Grand  Lodge  has  practically  and 
voluntarily  repudiated  her  jurisdiction  over  the  loyal  portion  of  her 
territory  and  left  the  Fraternity  there  without  the  means  of  Masonic 
intercourse,"  &e.  He  then  proceeds  to  argue  that  the  portion  of  Vir- 
ginia invaded  by  the  army  of  the  United  States,  is  in  the  condition  of 
a  territory  in  which  Masonry  in  an  organized  form  never  existed,  and 
that  any  Grand  Lodge  may  grant  a  charter  to  Lodges  to  work  there, 
and  those  Lodges  may  form  a  Grand  Lodge.  The  subject  was  referred 
to  a  Committee,  and  the  Grand  Lodge  was  called  to  refreshment. 

On  the  14th  February,  B.  B.  French,  P.  G.  M.  of  G.  L  D.  C, 
addressed  to  G.  M.  Stansberry  a  vindictive  and  truculent  letter,  in 
which  he  takes  up  the  assertion  that  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  for- 
bids  those,  working  under  its  jurisdiction  to  recognize  or  hold  Masonic 
intercourse  with  Masons  who  adhere  to  their  allegiance  to  the  United 
States  5  denounces  the  Grand  Lodge,  and  counsels  the  Grand  Lodge  of 
the  District  of  Columbia  to  issue  dispensations  to  loyal  and  worthy  Masona 
anywhere  in  Virginia  to  open  Lodges,  and  proceed  to  work  until  the 
Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  shall  return  to  the  principles  of  Free  Masonry 
and  assume  her  legitimate  sphere  among  the_  Grand  Lodges  of  the 
Union. 

We  pause  here  for  some  comments. 

In  pure  old  English,  we  pronounce  the  statement  that  the  Grand 
Lodge  of  Virginia  forbids  Masons  working  under  its  jurisdiction  to 
recognize  or  hold  Masonic  intercourse  with  Masons  adhering  to  their 
allegiance  to  the  Union,  a  Lie. 

Grand  Master  Stansberry  says  tLe  charter  could  not  be  found,  and 


25 

everything  pertaining  to  the  old  Lodge  in  Alexandria  had  been  removed. 
He  says,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  the  petition  for  the  dispensa- 
tion could  not  t)e  entertained  for  a  moment;  but  the  question  was, 
whether,  in  the  present  state  of  things,  they  shall  establish  a  new  pre- 
cedent to  affurd  their  brethren  in  the  loyal  portion  of  Virginia  Masonio 
privileges. 

Now,  remember,  this  address  Was  delivered  ten  months  after  the 
armed  invasion  of  Virginia,  about  eight  months  after  the  battle  of  Bull 
Run,  and  the  object  attempted  to  be  artfully  covered  up  by  the  Grand 
Master  is  apparent.  The  armed  invasion  of  Virginia  had  then  forced 
the  Confederate  amy  back  about  twenty-five  miles  from  Alexandria, 
and  the  question  was,  whether  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia .should  establish  a  precedent  for  establishing  Lodges  in  the  rear  of 
the  invading  army.  The  statement  that  the  charter  could  not  be  found, 
and  everything  pertaining  to  the  old  Lodge  there  had  been  removed, 
afforded  no  pretext  for  creating  a  new  Lodge  there.  It  afforded  evidence 
that  the  old  Masons  of  Virginia  had  fled  with  horror  from  the  invasion, 
carrying  with  them  all  that  was  sacred  to  them  in  Masonry.  Who  the 
men  petitioning  for  the  dispensation  arc,  we  know  not.  They  may  be 
a  portion  of  those  greedy  cormorants  who  follow  the  track  of  an 
invading  army  to  batten  off  the  spoils  of  the  oppressed.  Yet  the  "Grand 
Master  gravely  states  the  question  is,  whether  they  are  to  set  the  pre" 
cedent  for  establishing  new  Lodges  in  the  territory,  from  which  Masons 
had  been  forcibly  driven.  In  other  words,  was  Masonry  to  render  itself 
subservient  to  an  aggressive  invasion  of  the  country,  and  sustain,  by  its 
sanctions,  the  political  and  military  power  of  the  invader? 

He  seems  himself  to  shrink  from  the  gross  Masonic  heresy  implied 
in  this  question.  He  inclines  to  think  it  cannot  be  done  if  it  be  an 
invasion  of  the  territory  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia;  but  in  the 
forai  of  a  query  he  suggests,  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  had  practi- 
cally and  voluntarily  repudiated  its  jurisdiction  over  all  the  loyal  por- 
tion of  Virginia.  Now,  Grand  Master  Sfcansberry  knew  when  he  made 
this  suggestion  he  was  making  a  false  suggestion  ;  for  he  well  knew  no 
officer  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  could  visit  Alexandria  without 
great  danger  of  being  incarcerated  in  one  of  the  bastiles  of  the  United 
.  as. 

The  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  Columbia  assembled  again  on  the 
15th  February,   1862,  and  Grand  rry  again  addT 

them.  He  now  disoloset  his  object  more  fully.  He  says  bo  has  made 
up  his  mind,  lie  argues  the  dispensation  may  be  granted  if  it  does 
not  invade  tho  jurisdiction  of  the  (!  i  of  Virginia-     Says,  in 

Masonry,  as  in  civil  government,  we  must,  regard   the   governmen 
facto  ;  argues  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of 


26 

Columbia  over  the  Masons  in  Alexandria  was  taken  away  by  its  retro- 
cession to  Virginia;  that  the  Masonic  status  is  regulated  by  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  and  says:  "Now,  the  Federal  Government 
does  not  acknowledge,  at  the  present  time,  .the  jurisdiction  of  the  dis- 
loyal government  of  Virginia  over  that  State.  On  the  .contrary,  it 
recognizes  another  government  loyal  to  itself;  and  quite  exceptional, 
irregular  and  provisional  in  its  stead."  Inquires,  if  the  action  of  the 
Federal  Government  is  the  guide,  are  we  (the  Grand  Lodge  D.  C)  to 
recognize  a  disloyal  Grand  Lodge  any  more  than  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment recognizes  a  disloyal  State  government.  He  then  inquires  into 
the  loyalty  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia,  and  says:  "If  disloyal, 
we  (the  Grand  Lodge  D.  C.)  are  not  bound  to  respect  her  jurisdiction." 

Now. here  we  have  the  mask  thrown  off.  The  question  whether  the 
existing  state  of  things  justifies  establishing  a  new  precedent  in  inva- 
sion of  our  rights,  is  answered  by  alleging  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia 
is  disloyal ;  thus  plainly  making  the  Masonic  right  of  Masons  depend 
on  their  opinions  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

The  Grand  Lodge,  by  a  vote  of  27  to  12,  approved  issuing  the  dis- 
pensation. 

At  the  semi-annual  communication  in  May,  1862,  the  Grand  Master 
stated  he  had  issued  his  dispensation,  for  Union  Lodge  in  Alexandria, 
to  Theodore  G.  Palmer  as  Master,  Geo.  W.  Knab  as  S.  W.,  and  E.  II. 
Delancy,  J.  \V.  He  says  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  represent  that 
act  as  unfriendly  to  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia,  and  an  invasion  of 
her  jurisdiction.  Says  he  did  not  so  intend  it,  and  does  not  so  regard 
it.  He  then  insultingly  says,  if  this  Grand  Lodge  has  the  interests  of 
universal  Masonry  at  heart,  it  must  approve  his  conduct;  says  if  we 
cannot  extend  protection  to-  those  ordinarily  under  our  control,  we  must 
consider  it  an  act  of  true  friendship  in  any  one  who  will ;  and  then 
says  :  "  If  I,  as  the  nearest  relative,  neighbor  or  friend  of  a  man  sud- 
denly stricken  with  paralysis  undertakes  to  protect  his  family,  and  guard 
his  interests  until  his  return  to  consciousness  and  vigor,  that  judgment 
must  be  perverse  indeed  that  could  only  see  in  such  an  act  an  act  of 
unfriendly  invasion  of  his  rights."  "The  illustration  (he  says)  is 
exactly  in  point."  Says  he  does  not  wish,  to  enlarge  his  jurisdiction, 
&c. ;  says,  the  moment  this  Grand  Lodge  resumes  the  active  control  of 
the  Fraternity  in  Alexandria,  the  dispensation  will  be  surrendered  to 
her,  &c,  and  immediately  adds  : 

"  la  a  communication,  received  a  few  days  ago  from  Brother  Palmer,  he 
requests  the  dispensation  may  be  continued,  with  a  view  to  the  formation  of  a 
new  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  and  the  extension  of  the  boundaries  of  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  to  the  old  limits."  "I  recommend  that  Union  Lodge  be  con- 
tinued under  dispensation." 


27 

We  have,  as  Masons,  much  to  bear  in  the  conduct  of  men  calling 
themselves  Masons,  and  have  to  restrain  the  expression  of  our  natural 
indignation  at  insult  and  unjust  reproach.  In  the  proceedings  of  the 
Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia  there  is  so  much  deliberate 
insult,  such  studied  prevarication-,  and  so  much  hostile  and  fraudulent 
invasion  of  our  Masonic  rights,  that  we  find  it  difficult  to  notice  their 
transactions  temperately;  but  it  is  our  duty  to  examine  them,  and  we 
must  do  it  briefly. 

Grand  Master  Stansberry  convened  the  Grand  Lodge  on  the  12th  of 
February,  1862,  to  consider  this  dispensation.  He  then  stated  the  lie 
we  have  already  noticed.  Said,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  the  peti- 
tion could  not  be  for  a  moment  entertained;  but  the  question  was, 
whether,  in  the  present  state  of  thiugs,  they  were  to  establish  a  new 
dent.  On  .that  question  he  pretended  to  decline  expressing  an 
opinion;  but  urged  the  action  on  the  false  suggestion  that  this  Grand 
Lodge  had  voluntarily  repudiated  her  jurisdiction  over  what  he  called 
the  loyal  portion  of  Virginia — and  in  the  form  of  queries,  argued  that 
that  portion  of  her  territory  was  now  a  Masonic  waste,  in  which  any 
Grand  Lodge  might  charter  a  Lodge. 

Having  grown  more  bold,  he  on  the  15th  February  said  his  doubts 
were  removed.  He  then  argues  the  action  of  the  Federal  Government 
was  to  establish  the  status  of  Masonic  jurisdiction.  The  Federal 
government  had  refused  to  recognize  the  disloyal  State  government  of 
Virginia.  Inquires  whether  this  Grand  Lodge  is  disloyal ;  asserts  it 
is,  and  says  :  "  If  disloyal,  we  arc  not  bound  to  respect  her  jurisdic- 
tion." And  in  May,  1862,  he  says  he  intended  nothing  unfriendly. 
He  attempts  to  throw  the  odium  of  his  unmasonic  conduct  on  us  by 
saying,  if  we  have  the  interests  of  Masonry  at  heart,  we  must  approve 
let — insultiugly  compares  us  to  a  paralytic,  and  represents  him- 
self as  a  true  friend  taking  care  of  our  property — suggests,  when  we 
resume  our  jurisdiction  he  will  surrender  the  dispensation  to  us — then 
-  from  behind  the  mask  and  says  Palmer  is  applying  to  have  the 
dispensation  continued  with  a  view  to  the  possibility  of  forming  a  new 
Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  and  restoring  Alexandria  to  the  District  of 
Columbia. 

The  mere  statement  of  these  points  in  his  course  shows  the  serpentine 
duplicity  of  this,  Grand  Master.  From  the  first  suggestion,  that  the 
question  was  whether  they  were  to  Bel  a  new  pr<  cedent,  to  the  announce- 
ment that  Palmer  wished  a  continuance  of  the  dispensation  in  view  of 
the  probability  of  forming  a  new  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia,  the  object 
dily  iu  view,  through  .-ill  his  suliterfuges  and  contortions,  is 
brow  of  our  Masonic  jurisdiction.  When,  he  announced  that 
the  charter  of  the  old   Lodge  could  not   be  found,  and  everything  per- 


28 

taming  to  it  had  been  removed,  he  knew  the  old  Masons  working  in 
Alexandria  had  fled  from  the  ruthless  invaders  of  their  homes;  and 
his  effort  to  form  a  new  Lodge  was  an  effort  to  supplant  them  by  new 
men.  When  he  pretended  that  he  was  as  our  next  friend  taking  care 
of  our  rights,  and  offering  this  new  Lodge  under  his  dispensation  to  us, 
he  knew  (for  he  discloses  it  in  the  next  sentence)  that  Palmer  wished 
this  dispensation  continued  to  form  a  new  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  and 
transfer  Alexandria  to  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 

If  men  are  to  be  judged  by  their  acts,  but  one  judgment  can  be 
passed  on  this  transaction.  It  is  that  this  was  a  deliberate  and  per- 
sistent effort  to  supplant  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Virginia  and  place  in  its 
Stead  a  new  Grand  Lodge  that  would  be  a  subservient  tool  of  the  men 
administering  the  government  of  the  United  States.  A  Grand  Lodge 
that,  under  the  pretext  of  loyalty  to  the  United  States,  would  deprive 
of  their  Masonic  rights  all  men  who  did  not  support  the  tyrannical 
usurpations  of  Lincoln  and  his  followers.  It  was  a  deliberate  effort  on 
the  part  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia  to  make 
Masonry  a  political  engine  to  overthrow  our  government  and  institu- 
tions, and  to  make  Masonry  a  mere  agency  in  the  hands  of  the  corrupt 
party  wielding  the  government  of  the  United  States. 

We  regret  these  things.  But  it  is  our  duty  to  put  them  on  record, 
that  the  conduct  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia  may 
forever  be  known  to  our  children  and  successors — and  in  so  doing,  we 
do  not  feel  we  are  bringing  a  reproach  on  Masonry;  for  the  shame  and 
disgrace  of  these  transactions  attaches  not  to  Masonry,  but  to  the 
unworthy  men  who  .have  sought  thus  to  degrade  it —men  who  them- 
selves are  unworthy  of  notice;  but  who  have  an  accidental  importance 
from  being  Grand  Master  and  Past  Grand  Masters  of  a  little  Grand 
Lodge,  with  five  miles  square  of  territory,  and  which  derives  its  sole 
consequence  from  its  location  at  the  seat  of  government  of  the  United 
States;  a  location  which  gives  its  members  a  special  opportunity  of 
selling  themselves  and  their  principles  to  the  men  corruptly  administer- 
ing that  government. 

We  state  with  pleasure,  that  we  do  not  find  in  the  documents  before 
us,  that  the  conduct  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Columbia 
has  been  approved  by  any  Grand  Lodge  of  the  United  States. 

In  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  Correspondence  of  the  Grand 
Lodge  of  New  York  on  this  subject  we  find  some  things  which  give  us 
pleasure,  but  mingled  with  much  that  repels  us  from  the  writers.  An 
article  from  the  pen  of  Past  Grand  Master  Simons  has  especially 
attracted  our  attention.  It  has  much  political  acerbity  and  many  erro- 
neous views  in  relation  to  the  conflict  between  the  United  States  and 
the   Confederate   States;    but   it  also   contains   many  sound   Masonic 


£9 

views.     We  extract  the  following  paragraph,  in  which  we  most  cordially 
concur.     He  says  : 

"  Masonry  can  have  no  sympathy  with  the  horrors  of  war,  do  desire  to  add 
fuel  to  the  flame  of  angry  passion  roused  to  its  utmost  intensity  by  the  incidents 
of  strife.  On  the  contrary,  her  mission  looks  to  \he  fraternization  of  the 
nations,  to  the  speedy  coming  of  the  time  'when  justice  may  he  secured  without 
resort  to  war.  The  administration  of  a  cup  of  water  to  the  wounded  or  dying, 
the  drying  up  a  single  tear,  is  to  her  more  glorious  than  though  her  banner 
floated  in  the  van  of  a  thousand  victories;  and  when  her  disciples  forget  this, 
whenever  they  mingle  in  the  bitter  waters  of  secular  strife,  they  turn  aside  from 
the  true  design  and  falsify  the  very  spirit  of  her  lessons." 

We  also  notice  with  approbation  that  the  Committee  of  Correspondence 
pay  they  have  no  more  right  to  prescribe  their  views  of  allegiance  to  us 
than  to  the  Grand  Lodge  of  Canada. 

But  it  is  our  duty  to  say,  that  even  these  sentiments  are  accompanied 
with  such  expressions  of  political  acerbity  and  reproach,  and  such  trucu- 
lent denunciations  of  our  government  and  of  us  as  citizens,  that  self- 
respect  would  forbid  us  as  men  to  hold  personal  intercourse  with  the 
persons  uttering  them.  If  Masons  at  the  North  who  entertain  correct 
Masonic  opinions  wish  them  to  have  their  perfect  work,  they  should 
learn  to  suppress  such  angry  utterances. 

Before  leaving  this  subject,  it  gives  us  pleasure  to  say,  that  from  the 
brief  extracts  of  the  opinions  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  California  found 
in  the-c  documents,  we  hope  that  Grand  Lodge  has  taken  true  Masonic 
ground  in  relation  to  this  war. 

It  now  remains  to  express  our  views  of  the  present  and  future  action 
this  Grand  Lodge  should  take  in  reference  to  the  Masonic  organizations 
of  the  United  States. 

When  our  State  withdrew  from  the  United  States,  the  United  States 
became  to  us  a  foreign  power ;  and  all  persons  owing  allegiance  to  that 
government  became  to  us  aliens,  and  when  they  waged  war  on  us  alien 
enemies. 

During  the  continuance  of  this  war  it  is  inconsistent  with  our  duty 
to  our  country  to  hold  correspondence  with  the  Lodges  and  Grand 
Lodges  of  the  North.  Masonry  is  essentially  a  secret  society,  and  the 
occasions  are  few  in  which  she  should  make  public  hjer  proceedings  out- 
side of  her  own  membership.  No  correspondence  with  bodies  of  men 
in  the  enemy's  countVy  ought  to  be  tolerated  by  the  government.  But 
even  if  a  regular  correspondence  could  be  held,  it  might  encourage  the 
delusion  that  a  portion  of  our  people  desired  to  return  under  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States.  We  are  well  satisfied  with  the  pure,  wise 
and  patriotic  administration  of  our  government,  and  cannot  consent  to 
any  act  which  would  for  a  moment  encourage  the  delusion  that  any  por- 


30 

tion  of  our  people  desire  a  re-union  with  the  United  States.  During 
this  war  all  communications  with  the  Masonic  organizations  of  the 
North  must  cease. 

But  this  war  will  end  and  peace  return ;  and  the  war  must  end  in 
one  of  two  ways:  lstrby  our  extermination;  or  2d,  by  the  acknowl- 
edgment of  our  separate  independence  as  States.  A  third  idea — i.  e., 
reconstruction  of  the  Union,  is  sometimes  held  forth  at  the  North ;  but 
this  is  so  abhorrent  to  us  and  to  our  people  that  we  prefer  extermination 
to  it. 

Now  we  know  the  United  States  cannot  exterminate  us.  It  may  kill 
many  of  our  people  and  inflict  great  injuries  on  us,  but  its  power  must 
stop  very  far  short  of  extermination.  The  only  end  of  this  war,  then, 
is  in  recognising  our  separate  independence  ;  and  when  peace  thus  comes, 
it  places  the  people  of  the  United  States  forever  to  us  as  aliens.  We 
can  then  never  resume  the  peculiarly  intimate  relations  which  by  comity 
existed  between  the  Masonic  organizations  of  the  United  States  and 
ourselves.  We  can  have  with  them  no  other  relations  than  we  hold  to 
all  the  Masonic  bodies  of  the  world. 

By  comity,  peculiarly  intimate  relations  fomerly  subsisted  between  the 
Grand  Lodges  of  the  United  States  and  ourselves.  We  were  drawn 
into  an  intimacy  with  those  Grand  Lodges  which  existed  with  no  other 
Grand  Lodges  in  the  world.  If  we  are  not  misled  by  the  documents 
which  we  have  read,  there  has  been  on  the  part  of  many,  and  perhaps 
all  of  those  Grand  Lodges,  a  disposition  to  abuse  the  power  these  close 
relations  gave  them.  We  believe  they  have  attempted  to  use  Masonry 
as  an  instrumentality  of  war  on  us.  We  think  the  Lodges  have  per- 
verted Masonry  from  its  true  end,  and  have  used  it  as  a  means  of  sustaining 
the  most  unjust  and  wicked  war  which  was  ever  waged  on  earth.  When 
the  design  to  destroy  and  exterminate  us  was  openly  avowed  by  the 
rulers  chosen  by  the  people  of  the  United  States,  the  Masonic  bodies 
have  been  found  urging  Masons  to  engage  in  this  war  as  a  Masonic  duty. 
Candor  compels  us  to  say  that  to  these  organizations  we  feel  an  aversion, 
as  bodies  that  have  proved  themselves  to  be  unworthy  depositories  of 
Masonic  power  and  perverted  teachers  of  its  doctrines. 

We  recommend  no  Masonic  intercourse  ever  be  held  with  these  Grand 
Lodges  or  their  subordinate  Lodges,  unless  it  is  sought  by  them  and 
satisfactory  evidence  given  to  us  that  the  Grand  Lodge  thus  seeking  in. 
tercourse  with  us  has  not  attempted  to  convert  Masonry  into  a  means  of 
sustaining  the  war  against  us. 

We  think  the  conduct  of  the  Grand  Lodge  of  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia has  been  so  grossly  unmasonic — so  marked  by  the  determination  to 
make  Masonry  a  degraded  political  agency,  and  a  subservient  instrument 
of  the  government  of  the  United  States  in  its  nefarious  effort  to  destroy 


31 

our  liberties,  and  its  determination  to  subvert  our  jurisdiction  by  false, 
hood  and  fraud  has  been  so  clearly  manifested,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  this 
Grand  Lodge  to  denounce  it  as  a  corrupt  Institution,  no  longer  worthy 
to  be  considered  a  Masonic  Body,  and  that  we  never  can  recognise  it  as 
a  Masonic  Body.  We  recommend  that  the  Lodge  attempted  to  bo 
established  by  it  in  Alexandria,  by  name  of  Union  Lodge,  be  declared 
a  clandestine  Lodge — all  its  members  and  Masons  working  with  them 
be  declared  clandestine  Masons,  aud  all  persons  attempted  to  be  made 
Masons  in  that  Lodge  be  declared  spurious  Masons. 

"We  also  recommend  that  all  Travelling  or  other  Military  Lodges 
attempted  to  be  established  or  authorized  to  work  in  our  jurisdiction 
and  without  our  consent,  by  any  of  the  Grand  Lodges  of  the  United 
States,  be  declared  clandestine  Lodges — all  their  members  and  all  Ma- 
sons working  with  them  be  declared  clandestine  Masons,  and  all  persons 
attempted  to  be  made  Masons  in  such  Lodges  be  declared  to  be  spurious 
Masons. 

In  reference  to  the  course  to  be  pursued  by  Masons  under  our  jurisdic- 
tion toward  individual  Masons  of  the  United  States,  we  say,  that 
although  we  believe  the  conduct  of  the  Grand  Lodges  and  subordinate 
Lodges  of  the  United  States  has  betn  grossly  unmasonic,  yet  the  rights 
of  individual  Masons,  who  have  not  participated  in  this  unmasonic  con- 
duct, are  not  forfeited  by  the  unmasonic  conduct  of  these  Lodges.  Wo 
believe  there  are  many  worthy  Masons  arrayed  against  us  from  various 
causes,  which  it  is  not  our  duty  to  judge.  We  hold  their  rights  and 
duties  as  subjects  and  citizens  are  entirely  distinct  from  their  Masonic 
rights  and  duties;  and  however  Masons  may  differ  on  political  ques- 
tions, as  long  as  they  worthily  perforin  their  duties  as  Masons,  their  in- 
dividual Masonic  rights  are  indefeasible.  The  conduct  of  all  Masons 
under  our  jurisdiction,  towards  individual  Masons  of  the  United  States, 
must  be  left  to  their  own  consciences.  All  we  can  say  to  them  is,  re- 
member the  duties  you  have  assumed,  and  act  in  their  spirit  as  far  as 
duty  to  God,  your  country  and  yourselves  will  permit. 

S.  S.  BAXTER,  Chairman. 


JOSEPH   RU7ICKA 
BOOKBINDERS 


